v~.-  y^ 


^A?\. 


IREiMlCUM;  or  An  Humble 
attempt  to  make  a 
Reconciliation  be- 
tween the  Bishop  of 
North  Carolina  and 
1  Dissenting1  Brethren 


C6e  Lt&tarp 

ottht 

Unitimiiv  of  JSortfc  Carolina 


Collection  of  jRortB  Catolmiana 
TOte  noofe  femg  pregfenteb 

Gp  2,ofc 


.1 


im»nrt©wsi§ 


An  humble  Attempt  to  make  a  Reconciliation 


THE  BISHOP  OF  NORTH-CAROLINA  AND  SOME  OF 
HIS  « DISSENTING'  BRETHREN, 

BT    SHOWING   THAT 

They  do  not  differ  so  widely  as  the  Public  have  been  led  to  suppose; 


RESPECTFUL  AND  FRIENDLY  LETTER  TO  THE  EDITOR  OF  THE 
(RICHMOND)  FAMILY  VISITOR. 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


IN  the  Family  Visitor,  a  religious  newspaper  printed  in  Richmond,  Virgi- 
nia, and  patronized  by  Episcopalians  as  well  as  by  other  denominations,  there 
appeared  on  the  8th  of  January  last,  some  remarks  of  the  Editor  on  the  con- 
troversies which  have  arisen  in  England  and  America,  with  regard  to  the 
expediency  of  Churchmen's  uniting  in  promiscuous  societies  for  the  circula- 
tion of  the  Scriptures  without  note  or  comment;  in  the  course  of  which  he 
gave  it  as  his  opinion,  that  Bishop  Ravenscroft  and  others  who  refused  to 
support  the  principle  on  which  Bible  Societies  are  founded,  were  utterly 
"  cfifiosed  to  the  distribution  of  the  Scriptures,  unless  accompanied  by  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  or  by  a  preacher  of  the  Church"  to  which  l.iey 
belonged.  As  the  Editor  had  not  seen  the  Bible-Society-Sermon  of  Bishop 
Ravenscroft,  but  had  drawn  his  information  respecting  its  sentiments  from  a 
short  notice  which  appealed  in  the  Raleigh  Register,  it  was  not  to  be  sup- 
posed that  he  could  have  had  a  just  or  perfect  knowledge  of  its  contents :  a 
friend  f  the  Bishop  therefore  sent  him  a  copy  of  the  discourse,  with  a  re- 
quest that  H  would  publish  certain  parts  of  it  in  the  Visitor,  and  at  the  sa 


(2)  ■        .1 


time  correct  the  misstatements  contained  in  the  paper  of  the^  date  abore 
mentioned.  The  Sermon  was  printed  entire,  but  the  piece  correcting  the 
misstatements  was  refused  admission,  because  it  was  too  long ! — because  it 
evaded  the  point  at  issue  I ! — because,  from  certain  allusions,  the  people 
could  not  understand  it ! — because  Bishop  Ravenscroft  possibly  might  not  be 
pleased  with  it ! ! — because  it  would  have  a  tendency  to  produce  an  unprofit- 
able, if  not  injurious,  controversy;— because,  Sec.  &c. — {Visitor,  Feb.  19.) 
The  correspondence  was  here  suspended  from  a  desire  of  preserving  peace, 
and  would  not  have  been  resumed  on  the  part  of  the  present  writer,  if  another 
attack  upon  Bishop  Ravenscroft  had  not  appeared  in  the  same  paper  a  few 
weeks  since,  in  the  shape  of  an  extract  from  the  Theological  Repertory, 
This,  like  the  former  article,  contained  gross  misrepresentations,  which  no 
friend  of  the  Bishop  could  suffef  to  pass  without  censure.  A  second  letter 
was  therefore  sent  to  the  Editor  ;  but,  disregarding  all  the  rules  which  should 
regulate  the  press  when  the  character  of  individuals  in  high  stations  is  at 
stake,  he  returned  it  to  the  writer,  without  giving  the  shadow  of  an  excuse 
for  his  conduct,  or  even  noticing  its  receipt  in  his  paper.  No  alternative  re- 
mains but  to  publish  it  in  a  pamphlet  form,  and  in  this  manner  to  make  an 
appeal  to  the  good  sense  and  justice  of  the  community  at  large,  who  will 
please  to  bear  in  mind,  that  no  unfriendly  feelings  are  harboured  by  the 
writer  against  the  Editor  of  the  Visitor,  who  deserves  commiseration  rather 
than  reprehension  for  his  want  of  judgment  in  selecting  and  refusing  articles 
intended  for  the  amusement  or  edification  of  his  readers. 

N.  B.    The  notes  in  brackets  []  have  been  added  since  the  letter  was  first 
sent  to  the  Visitor, 


L      '<J 


For  the  Family  Visitor. 
IRENICUM. 


Mr.  Editor, 

Iv  several  of  your  late  papers,  I  have  seen  some  good  remarks  on  the 
expediency  of  cultivating  harmony  and  a  friendly  intercourse  among  the 
different  members  of  the  Christian  family,  as  the  best  means  of  stopping  the 
mouths  of  gainsayers,  and  of  exhibiting  Christianity  in  the  form  in  which  it 
appeared,  when  its  divine  Founder  *  went  about  doing  good.'  These  remarks, 
made  without  doubt,  in  a  spirit  of  meekness  and  moderation,  and  with  a 
sincere  desire  of  removing  every  impediment  to  the  progress  of '  pure  and 
nndefiled  religion,' — should  be  well  weighed  by  the  earnest  inquirer  after 
truth,  and  should  command  the  attention  of  all  who  profess  to  follow  the  rule, 
'  thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself.'  But,  while  I  applaud  and  admire 
the  spirit  which  dictated  your  sentiments,  I  must  be  allowed  to  say  that  there 
is  one  gentleman  of  some  distinction,  towards  whom  you  do  not  appear  to 
feel  that  good-will  which  you  so  warmly  recommend  to  others.  The  bishop 
of  the  diocese  of  North-Carolina  has  rendered  himself  obnoxious  to  your 
displeasure ;  and  although  you  will  acknowledge  that  he  is  a  pious  and  ex- 
emplary pastor,  and  that  he  preaches  faithfully  the  "  fundamental  doctrines 
of  Christianity,"  yet  because  he  holds  and  fearlessly  maintains  certain  princi- 
ples, which  to  you  seem  peculiarities,  you  get  out  of  patience  at  every  recol- 
lection of  him,  and  take  every  opportunity  to  aim  a  direct  blow,  or  a  side 
thrust,  at  what  are  known  to  be  his  sentiments.* 

Now,  Sir,  I  beg  that  you  will  not  consider  me  as  desiring  to  stir  up  a  con- 
troversy,! or  as  wishing  to  excite  unhallowed  feelings;  but  when  I  find  a  dis- 
tinguished preacher  of  the  Gospel,  a  zealous  champion  of  the  cross,  a  devoted 
and  faithful  minister,  whose  exertions  in  Virginia  for  the  cause  of  his  Master 
have  been  crowned  with  signal  success — when  I  find  such  a  man  repeatedly 
held  up  to  be  pointed  at  with  the  fingerjtof  scorn,  my  passions  become 
roused;  and  I%aturally  make  the  inquiry  whether  his  principles  are  so 
dreadful  in  their  consequences  as  they  are  represented,  and  I  endeavour  to 
ascertain  whether  that  charity  which  hopeth  all  things,  may  net  be  extended 
to  his  frailties,  (supposing  them  to  be  such,)  which  is  extended  to  all  who 
are  acknowledged  to  hold  the  "  fundamentals."  I  trust  then,,  that  you  will 
permit  one  who  looks  upon  Bishop  R.  as  "  more  sinned  against  than  sinning," 
to  make  a  few  observations  on  certain  misstatements  which  have  appeared  in 
your  paper,  and  which  I  am  willing  to  impute  rather  to  a  zeal  for  exposing 
error,  than  to  any  design  of  misrepresentation  or  perversion ;  and  if  your 
readers  shall  find  from  these  remarks,  that  the  bishop  has  said  nothing  more 
than  what  the  most  eminent  divines  of  different  denominations  have  said,  it 
is  to  be  hoped  that  they  will  not  indulge  in  farther  unjust  or  illiberal  impu- 
tations, but  will  patiently  wait  for  his  replies  to  the  attacks  of  his  most  able 
antagonists ;  one  of  which  will  appear  in  the  bookstores  in  the  course  of  a 
very  few  days  |  3 

*  Some  of  the  strictures  which  have  appe  ared  in  ihe  Visitor  are  extracted  from  the  Washing- 
ton Repertory,  but  the  editor  of  the  Visitor  approves  of  them,  and  by  publishing  them,  adopts 
them  as  his  own. 

•j"  The  controversy  in  Virginia,  respecting  the  principle  of  the  Bible  Society,  originated  with 
the  Family  Visitor;  for  when  the  editor  published  his  first  remarks,  (Jan.  8,  18-25,)  not  a  copy  of 
Bishop  Ravenseroft's  Bible  Society  Sermon  was  to  be  obtained  in  the  bookstores  in  Virginia — but 
its  circulation  was  almost  entirely  confined  to  North-Carolina.  If  the  dispute  is  prolonged,  and 
becomes  productive  of  unfriendly  feelings,  I  shall  take  no  blame  to  myself,  as  my  only  object  is  to 
correct  errors,  and  to  have  justice  done  to  Rishop  R.  The  editor  of  the  Visitor  refused  to  admit 
a  piece  in  vindication  of  the  bishop,  on  the  19th  of  February  last,  because,  anion  ;  other  reasons,  it 
"would  have  a  tendency  to  produce  an  unprofitable,  if  not  injurious  controversy  ;''  but  I  would 
respectfully  inquire  whether  it  was  fair  or  charitable  to  admit  strictures  from  the  Repertory, 
when  every  thing  on  the  other  side  had  been  excluded  ? 

+  1  refer  to  the  answer  to  Professor  Mitchill's  letter,  lately  published  in  the  Profess or's  '  Cor- 
respondence."   Such  is  the  bishop's  confidence  in  the  goodness  of  his  cause,  thxt  1  am  i:iformed, 


?*!7*t 


(    4_  )  fe" 

1*  An  opinion  which  prevails  throughout  the  community,  and  which  the 
opponents  of  Bishop  R.  seem  fond  of  repeating,  is,  that  he  is  unfavourable  to 
the  distribution  of  the  Scriptures  without  note  or  comment.  The  editors  of 
the  Repertory  and  Evangelical  Magazine  have  lately  asserted  this  in  very 
broad  terms;  and  from  the  following  paragraph,  it  certainly  appears  that 
you  agree  with  them  in  supposing  that  such  are  the  sentiments  of  the- 
bishop. 

"  It  is  a  curious  as  well  as  a  painful  circumstance  in  the  history  of  the 
present  age,  that  while  the  Catholics  in  the  heart  of  Europe,  where  ignorance, 
and  superstition,  and  implicit  confidence  in  papal  infallibility  have  reigned 
for  ages,  are  earnestly  seeking  copies  of  the  Bible,  or  zealously  engaged  in 
its  circulation,  Protestant  bishops  are  to  be  found  who  oppose  its  distribution 
in  this  land  of  liberty,  intelligence,  and  free  inquiry."  (See  notice  of  Bishop 
JRavenscroft's  Sermon  in  Family  Visitor,  January  8,  IS25.J  But  is  tins  the 
fact  with  regard  to  the  bishop  of  North-Carolina  ?  Let  us  hear  his  own 
words  :— "  As  it  seems  to  be  the  determination  of  many  who  write  and  speak 
on  this  subject,  to  denounce  the  author  as  an  enemy  to  the  distribution  of  the 
Scriptures,  notwithstanding  his  express  declarations  to  the  contrary,  he  thinks 
proper  to  repeat  most  solemnly,  that  the  charge  is  unfounded."  "  Nor  yet 
is  the  author  opposed  to  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  withouta  commentator, 
as  is  falsely  charged  against  him.  On  the  contrary,  he  has  many  witnesses 
how  earnestly  and  repeatedly  he  presses  the  study  of  the  word  of  God  upon 
his  hearers:  and  it  is  his  invariable  rule,  when  consulted  what  commentator 
to  begin  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  with,  to  answer,  None  ;  recommending 
to  all  to  be  first  well  grounded  in  the  Scriptures  themselves,  by  reading, 
meditation,  and  prayer,  when  a  sound  and  judicious  commentator  may  be 
helpful."     (Preface  to  Bible  Society  Sermon,  p.  5.) 

But  supposing  that  Bishop  R.  had  asserted  that  it  was  inexpedient  to  cir- 
culate the  Bible  without  a  Prayer  Book,  or  an  authorized  ministry  to  accom- 
pany it;  would  he  have  gone  farther  in  principle  than  the  first  men  in  the 
Presbyterian  church?  Would  Jjie  have  taken  bolder  ground  than  is  taken  by 
the  General  Assembly  or  Dr.  MiTler,  when  they  recommendgjl  the  circulation 
•  of  Creeds  and  Confessions  ?  What  says  Dr.  Miller  ?  "  Confessions  of  faith, 
judiciously  drawn  and  solemnly  adapted  by  particular  churches,  are  not  only 
invaluable  as  bonds  of  union  and  fences  against  error,  but  they  also  serve  an 
important  purpose,  as  accredited  manuals  of  Christian  doctrine,  well  fitted 
for  the  instruction  of  those  private  members  of  churches,  who  have  neither 
leisure,  nor  habits  of  thinking  sufficiently  close,  to  draw  from  the  sacred 
writings  themselves  a  consistent  system  of  truth."  (Lecture,  p.  35.)  And  what 
says  the  united  wisdom  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  America  ?  "  Though 
the  confessions  of  faith,  and  standards  of  our  Church,  are  of  no  original  autho- 
rity, independent  of  the  Scriptures,  yet  we  regard  them  as.ji  summary  of 
those  divine  truths  which  are  diffused  through  the  sacred  volume.  They,  as 
a  system  of  doctrines,  therefore,  cannot  be  abandoned  in  our  opinion,  without 
AN  ABANDONMENT  of  the  word  of  God."  (Minutes  of  General  As- 
sembly, 1 824.)  According,  therefore,  to  the  principles  of  the  highest  authority 
in  the  Presbyteridn  communion — according  to  the  principles  of  one  of  their 
most  distinguished  professors — private  Christians  cannot  derive  from  the 
Scriptures  alone,  a  consistent  system  of  truth — but  the  word  of  God  must  be 
abandoned,  unless  it  be  accompanied  with  confessions  of  faith :  principles 
these,  which  we  would  recommend  to  the  '  Editors  of  the  Catholic  Miscel- 
lany' to  insert  in  their  paper,  as  evidence  that  the  Presbyterians  were  all 
coming  round,  if  we  really  supposed  that  men  could  be  such  idiots  as  to  mis- 
take every  thing  which  "  looks  like  popery"  for  popery  itself. 

he  has  actually  ordered  300  copies  of  Mr.  Mitchill's  letter  to  be  struck  off,  to  be  distributed  gra- 
tuitously among  those  Episcopalians  who  read  the  reply.  It  ought  to  be  understood  that  the  prin- 
cipal ground  of  controversy  at  the  present  time,  is  not  the  expediency  of  supporting  the  Bible 
Society,  but  the  proper  rule  in  the  interpretation  f>f  Scripture.  See  the  third  of  tha  following 
observations. 


(     5    ) 

I  am  well  aware  of  the  distinction  which  has  been  drawn  by  the  editors  of 
the  Visitor  and  Evangelical  Magazine,  between  requiring  "  an  explicit 
declaration  of  a  person's  assent  to  the  doctrines  held  by  any  church  before  he 
is  admitted  into  its  bosom" — and  "  making  this  assent  the  condition  on  which 
the  Bible  shall  be  put  into  the  hands  of  those  who  are  sitting  in  the  region 
and  shadow  of  moral  death  ;"*  and  I  am  well  aware  that  Dr.  Miller,  in  a  late 
letter,  has  declared  his  belief  that  it  was  not  impossible  "  for  a  serious  inquirer 
to  understand  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Scripture,  without  the  assistance 
of  formularies  and  confessions ;"  but  had  these  gentlemen  carefully  examined 
the  above  quoted  passages,  they  would  have  endeavoured  to  extricate  them- 
selves from  the  dilemma  in  a  different  manner,  or  else  would  have  acknow- 
ledged, what  I  have  the  charity  to  believe,  that  the  language  used  by  the 
Assembly  and  the  professor  was  extremely  unguarded. f 

2.  Connected  with  this  subject  is  the  opinion  of  Bishop  Horsley,  which  has 
been  triumphantly  referred  to  by  the  Repertory,  the  Visitor,  and  the  Evan- 
gelical Magazine,  as  a  complete  refutation  of  Bishop  R's.  sentiments  on  the 
rule  of  faith.  But  before  we  condemn  the  Bishop  ol  North-Carolina,  on  the 
authority  of  the  Lord  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  let  us  inquire  whether  they 
actually  differ  \n  sentiment  with  regard  to  the  '  sufficiency  of  the  Scriptures,' 
and  the  best  method  of  studying  them.  The  following  passages  from  their 
respective  sermons,  igljrqj&in  parallel  columns,  will  place  the  prelates  in  a 
more  favourable  light  than  some  well  disposed  Christians  are  willing  to  view 
them : — 

Horsley.  Ravenscrofc. 

"  The  Bible  studied  will  indeed  "  That  the  Scriptures  are  the  well- 
prove  to  be  what  we  Protestants  es-  spring  of  life  and  hope  to  fallen  man, 
teem  it,  a  certain  and  sufficient  rule  and  the  infallible  rule  of  his  faith  and 
of  faith  and  firactice — a  helmet  of  practice  to  every  Christian,  is  assent- 
aalvation — which  alone  may  quench  ed  to  by  all.'"  "  It  is  indubitably  cer- 
the  fiery  darts  of  the  wicked."  (Ser-  tain,  that  Holy  Scripture  containeth 
man  from  Psa.  xcvii.  7 ;  quoted  in  all  things  necessary  to  salvation,  so 
Repertory  and  Visitor,  ifc.)  that  whatsoever  is  not  read  therein, 

nor  may  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  re- 
quired of  any  man  that  it  should  be 
believed  as  an  article  of  faith,  or  be 
thought  requisite  or  necessary  to  sal- 
vation, as  it  is  expressed  in  the  sixth 
article  of  our  Church."     (Serjnon  on 
Interpretation  of  Scripture,  pp.  3,  6.) 
"  It  should  be  a  rule  with  every  one         "  To  search  the  Scriptures,  to  any 
who  would  read  the  Holy  Scriptures    profitable  purpose,  we   must   begin 
with  advantage  and  improvement,  to     with  the  foundation,  and  regularly  go 
compare  every  text,  which  may  seem     on,  to  the  finishing  of  the  superstruc- 
either   important  for  the  doctrine  it     ture,  and  comparing  spiritual  things 
may  contain,  or  remarkable  for  the     with  spiritual,  (that  is,  a   recorded 
turn  of  the  expression,  with  the  pa-     purpose   with  its  exact   fulfilment,) 
rallel  passages  in  other  parts  of  holy     obtain  that  full  conviction  of  the  in- 
writ ;  that  is,  with  the   passages  in     fallible  truth  and  divine  authority  of 

*  See  Visitor,  Feb.  19,  1825;  and  Evangelical  Magazine  for  June,  p.  323;  and  Dr.  Miller'* 
letter  addressed  to  the  New-York  Christian  Journal,  and  republished  in  the  Evangelical  Maga- 
zine Tor  February. 

[f  The  General  Assembly,  fearful  of  the  cousequences  which  might  result  from  a  reasonable 
construction  of  their  opinions  as  expressed  in  1824,  have  determined  to  put  doiuii  at  once  all 
opposition  ;  and,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  following  paragraph,  as  charitable  as  it  is  true,  have 
resolved  that  the  whole  world  shall  bend  to  their  authority.  "  To  oppose  this  institution  (the 
American  Bible  Society)  is  to  fight  against  God.  And  yet  we  have  seen  infidels,  and  ha'f 
reformed  Protestants,  UNITING  with  the  Papal  hierarchii,  iu  opposing  the  circulation  of 
the  word  of  life :  as  though  the  volume  which  Jehovah  has  adapted  to  the  constitution  of  man, 
and  sent  down  from  above  for  his  use,  and  made  efficient  in  his  redemption,  and  commanded  to 
he  given  unto  him,  could  not  with  SAFETY  be  committed  lo  his  hands." — [Narrative  of  the 
State  of  Religion,  &c.  May  26, 1825.)] 


*  '<■  ^     ■  -^ 


.....  -_-.««• — ■ — 


C    6    ) 


Horslcy. 
which  the  subject  matter  is  the  same, 
the  sense  equivalent,  or  the  turn  of 
expression  similar."  (Same  Sermon.) 


a  Particular  diligence  should  be 
used  in  comparing  the  parallel  texts 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments." 
"  In  doing  this,  you  will  imitate  the 


Ravenscroft. 
Revelation,  which  is  indispensable  to 
any  thing  worthy  the  name  of  rational 
assurance,  in  working  out  our  ever- 
lasting salvation." 

"The  duty  enjoined,  and  under  con- 
sideration, [of  searching  the  Scrip- 
tures,] involves  the  careful  examina- 
tion and  comparison,  not  only  of  the 
several  parts  with  each  other,  but  of 
each  part  with  the  whole."  "  The 
unbelieving  Jews  having  rejected  the 
evidence  of  John  the  Baptist,  to  the 
person  and  office  of  Jesus  as  the  pro- 
mised Messiah,  and  resisted  the  testi- 
mony of  our  Lord's  own  miraculous 
power,  in  attestation  of  the  same  fact, 
are  by  him  referred  to  the  Scriptures. 
In  which  reference  it  must  be  clear 
that  our  Lord  meant  such  a  careful 
consideratiCn-and  comparison  of  what 
was  foretold  by  the  prophets  concern- 
ing the  Messiah^  with  the  events  then 


be  sufficient  for  correcting  tueir  er- 
roneous prejudices,  and  to  produce 
a  rational  conviction  of  the  truth.** 
{Ibid. p.  4.) 


example  of  the  godly  Jews  of  Bcrea,  fuelling  before  their  eyes,  as  must 
which  is  recorded  with  approbation 
in  the  Acts ;  who,  when  Paul  and 
Silas  reasoned  with  them  out  of  the 
Scripturts  of  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
taments, clearly  setting  before  tliemtlie 
firofihecies  concerning  the  Messiah, 
and  the  accomplishment  of  those  pro- 
phecies in  Jesus,  whom  they  preached, 
'searched  the  Scriptures  daily,  whe- 
ther these  were  so.'  "     (Ibid.) 

Our  Right  Rev.  Fathers  are,  therefore,  so  far  from  being  at  loggerhead3 
with  each  other,  that  they  agree  perfectly  on  the  subject  of  the  sufficiency 
of  Scripture,  and  of  the  necessity  of  a  careful  examination  of  its  several  parts, 
in  order  to  make  it  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation.  But  this  is  not  all. 
Bishop  Horsley  not.  only  agrees  with  Bishop  Ravenscroft,  but  in  this  very 
Sermon  which  has  been  so  much  applauded,  recommends  a  method  of  study- 
ing the  Scriptures,  which  the  invariable  usage  of  Bible  Societies  renders 
impracticable  j  and  if  the  writer  in  the  Repertory  will  have  the  candour  to 
correct  his  mistakes,  he  will  ask  Bishop  Ravenscroft's  pardon,  and  acknow- 
ledge at  the  same  time  that  he  acted  unfairly  in  omitting  those  parts  of 
Bishop  Horsley's  ^ermon  which  had  reference  to  the  printing  of  "  marginal 
readings"  In  reading  the  article  quoted  in  the  Visitor,  I  observed  the 
words,  ["  If  the  Bible  be  studied  in  this  manner"]  occurring  in  different 
places;  and  although  "  parallel  passages"  are  once  spoken  of,  I  should  not 
have  known  the  precise  object  of  Bishop  Horsley's  remarks,  if  I  had  not  re- 
ferred to  the  Sermon  itself,  where  I  ascertained  that  he  had  been  recom- 
mending to  the  "  Society  for  the  Promotion  of  Christian  Knowledge,"  the 
publication  of  Bibles  with  a  "full  margin,"  in  order  that  the  "  illiterate 
Christian"  might,  by  consulting  the  marginal  references,  compare  parallel 
texts, — and  "  in  this  manner"  attain  that  practical  knowledge  which  is  ne- 
cessary to  salvation.  You  may,  therefore,  judge  of  my  surprise  and  mortifi- 
cation, Mr.  Editor,  at  seeing  a  respectable  magazine  garbling  the  sentiments 
of  an  author,  in  order  to  support  the  cause  of  societies  which  forbid  any 
Bibles  to  be  issued  from  their  presses  with  marginal  readings,  and  thus  pre- 


c 


(    7    ) 


elude  the  possibility  of  studying  the  Scriptures  in  the  '  manner''  so  zealously 
enforced  by  the  author  referred  to. 

3.  The  main  ground  of  controversy,  at  the  present  time,  between  Bishop 
Ravenscroft  and  his  opponents,  is  the  opinion  given  by  him  on  the  subject  of 
the  correct  interpretation  of  Scripture.  This  opinion  was  alluded  to  in  his 
Bible  Society  Sermon,  and  enlarged  upon  in  a  subsequent  discourse,  en- 
titled, "  A  Serrnon  on  the  Study  and  Interpretation  of  the  Scriptures;"  and 
as  the  former,  being  written  in  haste,  and  lor  a  different  purpose,  could  not 
be  expected  to  be  as  full  and  explicit  on  this  point  as  the  importance  of  the 
subject  demanded,  it  is  proper  to  quote  from  the  latter  so  much  as  will  place 
the  author's  sentiments  on  the  rule  of  faith  in  a  clear  light,  and  guard  him 
from  misrepresentation. 

"  While  it  is  indubitably  certain  (says  Bishop  R.)  that  Holy  Scripture 
containeth  all  things  necessary  to  salvation,  so  that  whatsoever  is  not  read 
therein,  nor  may  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be  required  of  any  man  that  it 
should  be  believed  as  an  article  of  faith,  or  be  thought  requisite  or  necessary 
to  salvation,  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  sixth  article  of  the  Church ;  it  is  never- 
theless equally  certain,  that  uniformity  of  belief  and  practice  among  men,  in 
other  words,  Christian  unity,  must  depend  upon  the  interpretation  given  to 
the  Scriptures — upon  the  sense  and  application  made  of  the  doctrines  and 
precepts  therein  revealed.  It  is,  therefore,  of  the  last  importance  to  the  very 
being  of  the  Scriptures  as  the  only  standard  of  saving  faith,  as  well  as  to  the 
comfort  of  your  own  souls,  that  your  minds  should  be  grounded  and  settled 
on  this  point.  To  this  end  I  shall  give  the  rule,  and  then  explain  and  enforce 
it,  by  some  plain  and  obvious  examples." 

M  The  rule  then  is,  that  that  interpretation  of  Scripture  is  to  be  followed 
and  relied  upon,  as  the  true  sense  and  meaning,  which  has  invariably  been 
held  and  acted  upon  by  the  one  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ. 
In  explanation  of  this  rule,  it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind,  my  brethren,  that  while 
God  hath  fully  and  clearly  revealed  his  will  to  us,  yet  he  hath  so  done  it,  as 
*to  form  a  part  of  our  trial.     While  all  things  necessary  to  salvation  are  set 

forth  in  his  word  for  our  learning,  Scripture  is  nevertheless  so  constructed,  LL 
,that  "  the  unlearned  and  the  unstable  can  wrest  dp91|  to  their  own  destruc-  Aw 
Hon"  and  the  word  of  the  Gospel  is  either  \  a  savour  of  life  or  a  savour  of 
death,'  as  we  receive  and  apply  it.  Now  if  this  was  the  case  in  the  Apostolic 
age,  as  St. Peter  and  St.  Paul  both  declare  that  it  was,  much  more  is  it  possible 
and  to  be  expected  in  these  days  of  multiplied  divisions  and  latitudinarian 
departure  from  the  faith ;  and,  therefore,  the  more  earnestly  to  be  contended 
against  by  those  who  are  set  for  the  defence  of  the  Gospel." 

"  If  the  inquiry  then  be,  which  of  two  or  more  conflicting  doctrines  or 
systems  of  religion  be  the  right  one,  and  tw  be  received  and  relied  upon  as  the 
truth  of  God, — I  answer,  first,  "  how  readest  thou,  what  saith  the  Scripture  ?" 
Is  one  of  the  doctrines  or  systems  clearly  revealed  therein,  or  reasonably 
without  force  and  refinement,  to  be  deduced  from  what  is  thus  revealed  ?  Is 
it  free  from  opposition  to  the  other  doctrines  and  general  design  of  revela- 
tion ?  If  so,  there  need  be  no  difficulty:  the  doctrine  or  system  thus  sup- 
ported is  to  be  received  as  true.  But  suppose  the  ingenuity  of  man's  wisdom, 
in  support  of  some  favourite  system,  shall  have  thrown  over  the  subject  such 
a  gloss  of  perverted  Scripture  and  specious  reasoning,  as  to  render  it  difficult 
for  a  plain  mind  to  disentangle  the  sophistry  of  the  argument,  and  for  an 
humble  mind  to  resist  the  authority  of  great  and  learned  names,  and  of  nu- 
merous bodies  of  professing  Christians  built  upon  this  system, — what  then  is 
the  only  standard  to  which  we  can  have  recourse  ?  To  this  I  answer,  the 
word  of  God  as  received,  believed,  and  acted  upon  universally  by  the  primi- 
tive Church  " — {Sermon,  pp.  6  and  7.) 

Now,  Sir,  to  apply  this  rule  to  one  or  two  disputed  doctrines.  The  eternal 
generation  of  the  Son  of  God  is  a  doctrine  maintaine**  )by  the  great  body  of 
true  believers;  yet  we  know  that  a  spirited  controversy  arose  on  this  subject 
about  two  years  since,  between  Professor  Stewart  and  Professor  Miller,  both 


{ A 

(    8    ) 

generally  reputed  to  be  orthodox,  learned,  and  pious^  These  gentlemen  re- 
ferred in  the  first  place  to  Scripture, — but  as  the  passages  of  Scripture  relating 
to  the  eternal  generation  were  very  few,  and  as  he  "  ingenuity  of  man's  wisdom 
threw  over  the  subject  such  a  gloss  of  perverted  Scripture  and  sfiecious  rea* 
soning,  as  to  render  it  difficult  for  a  plain  mind  to-  disentangle  the  sophistry 
of  the  argument,"  recourse  was  had  to  "'the  word  of  God,  as  received,  be- 
lieved, and  acted  ufion  universally  by  the  primitive  Church  ;"  not  because  th«i 
writers  imagined  that  the  opinions  of  the  Fathers  proved  the  eternal  genera- 
tion, but  because  (in  the  language  of  Professor  Kiild)  «♦  these  opinions  de- 
monstrated the  sentiments  of  many,  whose  opportunities  of  knowledge  from 
the  earliest  preachers  of  Christianity  were  most  extensive,  and  whose  rank, 
piety,  and  research  are  universally  acknowledged  by  the  Catholic  Church.* 

Let  us  take  one  more  case.  Infant  baptism  has  been  a  subject  of  a  great 
deal  of  contention  in  the  Christian  Church.  The  Pcedobaptist  confidently 
refers  to  the  word  of  God,  and  verily  believes  that  although  there  is  no  ex- 
press and  special  command  for  the  baptism  of  infants,  yet  its  propriety  and 
necessity  may  be  established  by  inference.  And  if  the  justice  of  his  conclu- 
sions be  denied,  he  refers  to  the  practice  of  the  primitive  Church  as  the  best 
commentary  on  Scripture, — he  refers  to  the  "  Semper^  Ubique,  jib  Omnibus,'* 
of  Vincentius,  to  prove  the  fact  of  universal  custom  derived  from  the  Apostles. 
Such  is  the  mode  of  argument  used  in  the  first  number  of  the  Pamphleteer, 
and  as  the  author  holds  a  distinguished  rank  among  the  divines  ot  Virginia,  I 
shall  make  a  few  extracts  from  his  work,  not  for  the  purpose  of  arguing  the 
question  of  infant  baptism,  nor  of  defending  his  mode  of  reasoning;  but  merely 
to  show  that  Bishop  Ravenscroft  has  done  nothing  more  than  maintain  the 
principles  which  have  been  acted  upon  by  the  first  men  of  other  denomina- 
tions. 

At  p.  64  of  the  Pamphleteer,  Dr.  Rice  commences  a  "  brief  account  of 
the  most  direct  and  explicit  testimonies  of  the  Fathers"  on  infant  baptism, 
and  refers  to  Origen,  of  the  third  century,  who  has  these  remarkable  words: 
"  The  Church  hath  received  a  tradition  from  the  Apostles,  to  give  baptism 
unto  infants."  t 

The  next  testimony' (pV65)  is  that  of"  a  whole  council,  consisting  of  above 
sixty  Bishops;"  and  the  "unanimity  of  such  a  number"  is  adduced  as  an 
argument  that  "  there  was  but  one  opinion  and  one  practice  in  the  whole 
Christian  Church,  with  respect  to  infant  baptism." 

The  third  proof  is  from  the  work  which  "  goes  under  the  name  of  Diony- 
sius  the  Areopagite."  In  answer  to  the  question,  "  why  children  are  made 
partakers  of  the  sacred  birth,"  he  says—-"  Many  things  of  which  we  do  not 
now  see  the  reason,  are  worthy  o^-God.  We  affirm  of  this  the  same  things 
which  our  divine  guides  have  h&.ided  down  to  us.  Our  divine  guides  ap- 
pointed that  infants  should  be  admitted  after  the  sacred  manner."—"  By  di- 
vine guides,  saith  Maxentius,  is  meant  the  apostles." — (P.  66  ) 

Passing  over  the  testimonies  of  Gregory,  Ambrose,  Chrysostom,  Jerome, 
and  Paulinus,  who  flourished  as  late  as  the  fourth  century,  we  come  to  Au- 
gustine of  the  fiftfi.  "  In  his  discourse  concerning  baptism,"  he  says — "  This 
is  held  as  tradition  by  the  universal  Church,  when  infants  are  baptized, 
&c."— (P.  68.) 

The  last  testimony  is  from  the  decrees  of  the  councils  of  Carthage  and 
Miletus,  which  sat  in  the  fifth  century,  in  the  second  of  which  it  is  said  "  that 
the  Catholic  Church,  every  where  diffused,  always  understood  and  asserted 
that  this  was  an  Apostolical  practice." 

With  much  respect,  I  am,  Sir,  your  obedient  and  humble  Servant, 

CANDOUR. 

[Mote. — For  an  admirable  specimen  of  the  ingenuity  which  some  men  possess,  of  supporting 
opposite  sides  of  a  que#(f  font  ('Afferent  times,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  June  number  of  the 
Evangelical  Magazine,  ed'-^d  by  ihe  author  of  the  P»mph..teer-3 

*  See  a  Dissertation  on  the  Eternal  Sonship,  by  Dr.  Kidd,  a  learned  Presbyterian  divine  of 
Scotland,  chap.  xiv. 


•tt* 


UNIVERSITY  OF  N.C.  AT  CHAPEL  HILL 


00033986526 

This  book  must  not 
be  taken  from  the 
Library  building. 


. 


